"Columbine" vs. "No Easy Answers"

New to the site but became very interested in the killings due to sheer volume of documentation and information along with the psychological aspect. Most people don't understand my interest and can't realize that I don't like what Eric and Dylan did nor have any justification for their actions yet find them fascinating.

I have read Columbine and Brooks Brown's book No Easy Answers... I was struck by how differenly the two books described many events and how the suggested motives were completely different. Brooks went with the bullied kids theory while Cullen went with more of a "perfect storm" of two mentally disturbed kids. One a psychopath the other a depressive type.

I guess I'm interested to hear other's take on this and if you've read both books what do you think of the dichotomy.

tigerclone wrote:

New to the site but became very interested in the killings due to sheer volume of documentation and information along with the psychological aspect. Most people don't understand my interest and can't realize that I don't like what Eric and Dylan did nor have any justification for their actions yet find them fascinating.

I have read Columbine and Brooks Brown's book No Easy Answers... I was struck by how differenly the two books described many events and how the suggested motives were completely different. Brooks went with the bullied kids theory while Cullen went with more of a "perfect storm" of two mentally disturbed kids. One a psychopath the other a depressive type.

I guess I'm interested to hear other's take on this and if you've read both books what do you think of the dichotomy.

I think that Cullen's book is a crock of shit to be perfectly honest. That is my Take.

Brooks' book has some exaggerations and he repeats the same things over and over again (IE if the police would have listened to us) although he has a point....

Have you read Sue's book yet? I thought that was a pretty good book.

I agree with both assessments. Brooks certainly has a high opinion of himself too. And I can't wait to read Sue's book. Waiting for it to be available at my local library.

tigerclone wrote:

I agree with both assessments. Brooks certainly has a high opinion of himself too. And I can't wait to read Sue's book. Waiting for it to be available at my local library.

If you want I have a PDF copy of it I could send to you

You can also read Columbine: A True Crime Story by Jeff Kass
Personally, I think it's the best book about columbine.

Cullen gets panned a lot on here but I think the overall idea if 'a perfect storm' isn't too far out.

Draw_It_White wrote:

Cullen gets panned a lot on here but I think the overall idea if 'a perfect storm' isn't too far out.

I will agree with that because I do think it was a perfect storm of a bunch of diff things.

Thank you for the offer on the pdf! I am actually finishing the Newtown book right now and Sue's book will be available when I am through. I will definitely look into A True Crime Story.

There is no doubt in my mind that the "perfect storm" theory has validity. There is also no doubt (based on Eric and Dylan's writings) that the bully theory and resentment towards the culture at Columbine has validity as well.

The way I've heard it explained makes a lot of sense and from reading their journals it appears clear that Eric had a leadership role if you will. And Dylan maybe wasn't manipulated as much as he saw NBK as a way out.

No matter one thinks of Brooks or whatever you think of Cullen, one thing that is indisputable is that Brooks was there, did know E &D and did go to that school.You can't say any of that about Cullen.
Brooks has said that he resents Cullen saying that all the bullying and unfair treatment he himself lived through basically never happened.
I can't say I blame him for that.

tigerclone wrote:

Thank you for the offer on the pdf! I am actually finishing the Newtown book right now and Sue's book will be available when I am through. I will definitely look into A True Crime Story.

There is no doubt in my mind that the "perfect storm" theory has validity. There is also no doubt (based on Eric and Dylan's writings) that the bully theory and resentment towards the culture at Columbine has validity as well.

The way I've heard it explained makes a lot of sense and from reading their journals it appears clear that Eric had a leadership role if you will. And Dylan maybe wasn't manipulated as much as he saw NBK as a way out.

Can you explain why you think Eric was the leader?He seems to have done more of the actual preparation but considering how lazy and apathetic Dylan felt in the last year of his life ,this is not really a surprise.

There is not one single thing I suppose that makes me believe that. I guess I just related the amount of work Eric did in preparation and his seeming to call the shots during the Basement Tapes (the transcripts). The amount of shots fired (I read this in Cullen's book. If there is other evidence that suggests this is false, I apologize). Just a culmination of things I've read.

I will say I read the stickied portion talking about NBK possibly being Dylan's brainchild. And the entries from his journal that were cited bring up some big questions. That was a perspective I hadn't heard, good stuff.

I don't think Eric's manipulative ways can be dismissed though. The way he duped the diversion officer and even wrote a paper about his remorse for the van break in. Then was writing in his journal about hating the system and hating the owner for being so stupid etc. For him to have everyone else eating out of the palm of his hand (including his former military father), it doesn't take much for me to believe he had Dylan doing the same.

tigerclone wrote:

There is not one single thing I suppose that makes me believe that. I guess I just related the amount of work Eric did in preparation and his seeming to call the shots during the Basement Tapes (the transcripts). The amount of shots fired (I read this in Cullen's book. If there is other evidence that suggests this is false, I apologize). Just a culmination of things I've read.

I will say I read the stickied portion talking about NBK possibly being Dylan's brainchild. And the entries from his journal that were cited bring up some big questions. That was a perspective I hadn't heard, good stuff.

I don't think Eric's manipulative ways can be dismissed though. The way he duped the diversion officer and even wrote a paper about his remorse for the van break in. Then was writing in his journal about hating the system and hating the owner for being so stupid etc. For him to have everyone else eating out of the palm of his hand (including his former military father), it doesn't take much for me to believe he had Dylan doing the same.

I thank you for explaining your belief. One thing I think to consider is that Dylan must have been pretty manipulative too.People never saw it coming with him and still to this day,many people see him as a decent kid who was preyed upon in his depression and led into this by bad seed Eric.That is basically the Cullenite view.I think Eric did well with many adults because unlike a lot of teens he was hardworking and responsible.
If he said he'd have the paper in on Monday, he did.If he said he'd be there at 10, he was usually there at 10.
You can say he did it out of manipulation and I'm sure he wanted to get out of the program for his own ends but he generally did all the program told him to do and did it on time without complaining much,unlike Dylan who openly bitched about some of the requirements and even wrote a sarcastic paper about one of the courses he had to spend a Saturday taking.
Dylan also got some of his payments in late and annoyed the officer so much by being late for his appointments several times in a row that she threatened if it happened again he's have to come in after school every day.
Dylan not raising his grades during much of diversion and being late with his homework assignments was a big part of that too.
The diversion program must have appreciated Eric's relative cooperation.

I agree, there is no doubt Eric did much better in the program than Dylan did. That is a fact. The reason for that and what can be garnered from that are obviously speculation. But that's what I have appreciated in my short time here. Different perspectives on things that while reading and researching alone I may never consider.

I never saw Dylan as a victim or given him less responsibility for the massacre but if I'm honest, I have always viewed him as the one that was the follower and manipulated.

In hearing your (and other's) perspective I have now started to see things from the other side. Your thinking opens up a whole thought process that is new to me. I guess I had unwittingly fully subscribed to the Cullen theory.

Now I'm seeing Eric's doing all the work and investing most of the time and money to NBK as possible evidence that Dylan had Eric on the puppet strings. I mean, who's the one that got manipulated if Eric did all the work and Dylan just carried out the plan on 4/20?

I'm still not completely sure Eric wasn't the leader and Dylan the follower. But your perspective and some other things I have read here have certainly gotten the wheels turning.

Another point you made that I agree with is that while Brooks' book seemed to be self aggrandizing and repetitive, his being close to E&D and having been a student at Columbine gives his view a bit of credibility (for lack of a better term) that can't be ignored.

"Now I'm seeing Eric's doing all the work and investing most of the time and money to NBK as possible evidence that Dylan had Eric on the puppet strings. I mean, who's the one that got manipulated if Eric did all the work and Dylan just carried out the plan on 4/20?" Nah Eric wasn't manipulated into being the hands of NBK....he was a doer. He always delivered when it came to things he believed in. Eric wanted NBK just as much as it was Dylan's way-out himself. Eric didn't mind being the planner and the order-giver. They were both oscar-winning manipulators and liars to the people around them. I'll say though, Dylan comes out on top for that. Because Eric either carelessly or consciously left out many signs and clues hence the whole "he wanted to get caught" thing which I also still believe in.


And I am extremely done with the Leader-Follower thing. They were both equals and they had their roles. Perfect storm. Their issues were different, but they both wanted the same thing. Just because Dylan couldn't do the planning and was always abiding to Eric's orders it didn't make him a follower. What if Dylan didn't mind always being a step behind his friend since at the end of the day, what Eric was doing all the planning for is Dylan's brainchild? Which is 4/20/99?

I just finished Jeff Kass's book, and it was the best book out of them all IMO. I can't believe
I took so long to read it. I figured after Cullen and Brook's books, I'd have all the info basically available but Kass has alot of good details in his book!